I'd like to see some work done in our sport in terms of terminology and ratings systems. We all know that they don't make sense to anyone not intrenched in the sport, and they don't make sense to science either. I would really like to hear some discussion and input about this. We do not have to be satisfied with how things are...these jumbled nonsense terms that we've inherited are destined to extinction at some point because they don't really make sense on any level.

The terms HSS and LSS fall short of making sense in either a scientific way or an intuitive way as well. High speed stability makes some sense, but it's weird using a word like stable, which means balanced, to talk about how much a disc resists becoming unbalanced in the direction of the spin of the disc. It's also weird that very high speed stable discs have ratings like "0" or "+1". Low speed stability makes no sense, because we're actually talking about a disc becoming unstable or unbalanced and giving it a higher number the more the disc has a tendency to be unbalanced in the opposite direction of the spin. How would you deal with discs that both resist turning with the spin of the disc as well as resisting turning opposite of the spin? Read on...

I like the term "resistance" in place of both HSS. Resistance could be the tendency of a disc to resist turning with the direction of it's spin. So a disc like a FB would have a high resistance number and understable discs could be represented by integers based on how understable they are. This would eliminate the issue of speed stability and how some discs don't turn for some people, but will for more powerful throwers. No longer would the highest degree of resistance be represented by a "0".

We all know that the term stability is misused in our sport and it's a source of constant bickering. I think the term "stability" should be used to describe the disc's tendency to remain balanced in flight, aka how well/how long the disc holds it's line. Discs that really lock onto a line (ahem, MVP) would have high stability ratings, and discs that like to turn and fade more would have a lower stability number. Also, discs that are so overstable they want to turn soon out of the hand would have low stability ratings(because once again they resist flying stable or balanced). This would make SO MUCH more sense, however it would confuse the hell out of everyone for a time, but what change wouldn't?

As arbitrary as speed ratings can be, they cannot be simply left out of the equation, even if we divided disc into classes based on range. How would we rate fast overstable discs that have a fairly short range, but still move fast? I do think that we to use something like "potential speed" which connotes the fact that every thrower won't necessarily get the disc to it's potential.

Finally we need some sort of power requirement rating like Joe's has, which would be defined as the power it takes to make the disc behave according to it's other ratings.

Potential Speed, Resistance, Stability, and Power. What do you guys think?

allsport1313 wrote:Also, I look forward to a time where plastic and weight is reflected in the flight ratings. We all know a max weight champ or Z is not the same disc as its 150g dx/pro counterpart.

The biggest reason discs of different weights fly so different is because they are shape up differently due to different materials used and underfilling the mold. If a 175 disc was the exact shape of a 150 disc they would fly almost the same.

discspeed wrote:The biggest reason discs of different weights fly so different is because they are shape up differently due to different materials used and underfilling the mold. If a 175 disc was the exact shape of a 150 disc they would fly almost the same.

Perhaps I did not convey my message clearly. I am not interested about why discs fly differently; there are innumerable threads for that. My concern is that the current discs in production are given umbrella ratings under which all plastics and weights are marked with an identical set of flight characteristics.

discspeed wrote:The biggest reason discs of different weights fly so different is because they are shape up differently due to different materials used and underfilling the mold. If a 175 disc was the exact shape of a 150 disc they would fly almost the same.

Perhaps I did not convey my message clearly. I am not interested about why discs fly differently; there are innumerable threads for that. My concern is that the current discs in production are given umbrella ratings under which all plastics and weights are marked with an identical set of flight characteristics.

Yeah but even still, I have a 167 Champ Beast and a 168 Champ Beast that fly completely different. The 167 is more like 10,6,-3,1 while the 168 is 10,5,-2,2. You can't really give ratings to plastics and weights. However, I do see what you are saying...I just don't think it comes down to that factor.

I like how Lat marks their discs. they just say understable control driver (vision) or superfast over stable long range driver (Halo) overstable wind resistant long range driver (Blitz). I know you don't like "long range driver" I don't like "fairway driver" personally.

Here's my idea destined for flames: I think the manufacturers should describe the discs like above but without numbers. and then the PDGA or whoever can develop the numbers and use certain older molds as the baseline. and they should publish the ratings for different weight ranges and plastics. and they wouldn't categorize the discs they would just say how the disc behaved at different velocities and distance ranges.

an example of a disc designation by mfgr: Eagle-X - line shaping hard fading control driver, Teebird - straight flying late fading control driver.

I still like turn and fade. these are more path related terms I'll concede. what would you rather we use? precession? do we change turn to High speed precession and fade to low speed precession? Or should we express flight in Euler Angles?

keltik wrote:I still like turn and fade. these are more path related terms I'll concede. what would you rather we use? precession? do we change turn to High speed precession and fade to low speed precession? Or should we express flight in Euler Angles?

whatever terminology is used needs to be simple.

That's why I said resistance for HSS. Since LSS is simply a function of other factors(height, nose angle, disc speed, power requirement) I don't think we should have a rating for it. As discs wear they don't lose LSS but rather HSS because LSS doesn't really exist as a separate character of flight...Discs appear to lose LSS because they turn slightly in flight and then are in position to move straighter as they slow and move counter to their spin(fade). On my proposed system the stability(tendency of a disc to stay balanced in flight/hold it's line) rating along with the resistance(tendency of a disc to resist turning in the direction of the spin) rating would paint a good picture of how the disc's flight was going to end. For example disc that liked to really turn and fade would would have a negative resistance rating and a low stability rating...This tells you that the disc turns easily, yet does not hold a line long (which means obviously that it is going to fade out of it's turn).

discspeed wrote:Since LSS is simply a function of other factors(height, nose angle, disc speed, power requirement) I don't think we should have a rating for it. As discs wear they don't lose LSS but rather HSS because LSS doesn't really exist as a separate character of flight...Discs appear to lose LSS because they turn slightly in flight and then are in position to move straighter as they slow and move counter to their spin(fade).

What the hell are you on about? I have several examples of discs that have retained their HSS yet lost their fade i.e. low speed stability. They don't turn any easier than they used to yet finish a lot straighter than when they were new.

You know full well that turn happens when the center of lift is behind the center of the disc and fade happens when it's in front of the center of the disc. Both at affected by speed and angle of the disc, and most definitely by the shape of the disc. LSS is just as much a flight characteristic as is HSS. Where HSS indicates how easily and fast the center of lift moves behind the center of the disc (with pure disc speed, nose down, whatever you want to use to achieve it) LSS indicates how easily and fast it moves in front of the center of the disc.

Parks wrote:If the posts on this forum are any indication, the PD is like a Teebird with sunshine coming out of its butthole so hard that it flies faster.

None of my discs really did that. The best Rocs i've had have lost a lot of LSS and a little HSS so it's close to what you are saying but not quite in the best cases for me. Which discs have acted like that for you?

Flat shots need running on the center line of the tee and planting each step on the center line. Anhyzer needs running from rear right to front left with the plant step hitting the ground to the left of the line you're running on. Hyzer is the mirror of that.

JR wrote:None of my discs really did that. The best Rocs i've had have lost a lot of LSS and a little HSS so it's close to what you are saying but not quite in the best cases for me. Which discs have acted like that for you?

My best two examples are my Baseline JOKERi and my Baseline RESPECTi. I have yet to turn them in any wind, but especially the JOKERi has lost almost all of its fade.

Then there are the discs that don't seem to lose their fade, but start to develop a turn, like some of my P-PDs, my favorite S-PD, and some DD2s.

Parks wrote:If the posts on this forum are any indication, the PD is like a Teebird with sunshine coming out of its butthole so hard that it flies faster.

JR wrote:None of my discs really did that. The best Rocs i've had have lost a lot of LSS and a little HSS so it's close to what you are saying but not quite in the best cases for me. Which discs have acted like that for you?

My best two examples are my Baseline JOKERi and my Baseline RESPECTi. I have yet to turn them in any wind, but especially the JOKERi has lost almost all of its fade.

Then there are the discs that don't seem to lose their fade, but start to develop a turn, like some of my P-PDs, my favorite S-PD, and some DD2s.

Each disc has a speed past which it turns. I've not thrown the JOKERi or RESPECTi, but they are quite overstable when new, correct? So to begin with they have a very high speed they can take before they turn. So as you beat them in, they are losing HSS up above the ranges of speeds that you throw. You won't see turn until you've beaten the HSS all the way down to the range of speeds you throw, however this does not necessarily mean that your discs were not losing HSS before they turned for you.

Discs like the PD and DD have a lot lower speed at which they turn, likely just out of your range when new. So it doesn't take much wear for their HSS to fall in the range of speeds you throw.

I maintain that it is not possible to lose LSS without losing HSS.

I think some discs present this illusion because they have a VERY slow precession when they do turn, so much that it is just keeping the disc's forces balanced and moving straight. I think beaded and blunt nosed discs have a slower precession, so I think they often seem like they've lost their LSS and kept their HSS.

It's great and all if you'd like to use these ratings to describe discs on a personal level, or if you have a store of your own where you can present all types of rating systems, but regardless I think we're all comfortable with the individual manufacturer's ratings even if they aren't true for every thrower.

JR wrote:None of my discs really did that. The best Rocs i've had have lost a lot of LSS and a little HSS so it's close to what you are saying but not quite in the best cases for me. Which discs have acted like that for you?

My best two examples are my Baseline JOKERi and my Baseline RESPECTi. I have yet to turn them in any wind, but especially the JOKERi has lost almost all of its fade.

Then there are the discs that don't seem to lose their fade, but start to develop a turn, like some of my P-PDs, my favorite S-PD, and some DD2s.

My experiences lean toward that of discspeed's. My FR basic Jokeri turns in the wind and with unclean releases easier than a new one. I have not thrown a Respecti of any kind. I agree in that the basic Jokeri loses a lot of the LSS while losing relatively much less HSS than many other discs. And i have no trouble in accepting discspeed's analysis of the Jokeris being designed for high speeds starting out with very high HSS losing that. jub do you have measurements of how fast you throw and how fast the disc spins? It would be interesting to compare those possible differences. Are the winds and gusts in your area straight line winds or swirly like they tend to be here? Even when i spin up the used basic Jokeri it won't be fadeless and it sure flips up in the winds around here.

Flat shots need running on the center line of the tee and planting each step on the center line. Anhyzer needs running from rear right to front left with the plant step hitting the ground to the left of the line you're running on. Hyzer is the mirror of that.